tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184Tue, 14 Oct 2014 20:01:55 +0000Oklahoma Criminal Defense and Civil Rights Bloghttp://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)Blogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-6021954307010711676Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:44:00 +00002013-12-22T19:44:54.137-08:00Dissenting Opinion Regarding Rampant Brady Violations <div style="text-align: justify;">Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Kozinski wrote an important Dissent in, &nbsp;USA vs. Kenneth Olsen, 9th Circuit Case No. 10-36063, regarding the Rampant Brady Violations that are appearing across the country in recent years. Judhe Kozinski's opinion was joined by Judges Pregerson, Reindhardt, Thomas and Watford. I hope this case is appealed to the United States Supreme Court and I would be interested in seeing what the Supreme Court has to say about this case.&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Judge Kozinski began his opinion by stating "<span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: 12pt;">There is an epidemic of </span><span style="font-family: 'TimesNewRomanPSMT,Italic'; font-size: 12pt;">Brady </span><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: 12pt;">violations abroad in the land. Only judges can put a stop to it."&nbsp;</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: 12pt;">The case involved evidence tested by and testimony from "forensic scientist" Arnold Melnikoff. At the time of the trial Melnikoff was under investigation by Washington State authorities and was eventually fired for being "incompetent" and that he had committed "gross misconduct".&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: 12pt;">At the time of the Olsen trial 3 inmates from Montana, where Melnikoff had worked for the State Crime Lab, had been exonerated because of the flaw's in Melnikoff's work.&nbsp;</span></div><div class="page" title="Page 2"> <div class="layoutArea"> <div class="column"> <div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'TimesNewRomanPSMT'; font-size: 12.000000pt;">&nbsp;</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;">In this&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT;">important</span><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;">&nbsp;and courageous Dissent Judge Kozinski takes not only the prosecutors in the Olsen case to task for his actions, but Kozinski is critical of prosecutors across the country for failing to take their constitutional obligations seriously. Kozinski does not stop there he also&nbsp;criticizes&nbsp; his fellow judges for refusing to hold prosecutors responsible when the failure to disclose Brady and Giglio information comes to light.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;"><a href="http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2013/12/10/10-36063%20web.pdf" target="_blank">Read the Kozinski Dissent here.</a></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;">Kevin Adams</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.oklahomacriminallaw.com/">www.OklahomaCriminalLaw.com</a> &nbsp;</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div></div></div></div>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2013/12/dissenting-opinion-regarding-rampant.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-8328320565482100862Sun, 22 Dec 2013 04:30:00 +00002013-12-21T20:30:52.935-08:0010 Things Everyone Suspected of a Crime Should Know <blockquote><h1 align="center"><strong>10 Things Everyone Suspected of a Crime Should Know</strong></h1><div align="left"><strong>If you or someone you care about is suspected of a crime you should read this information before you or they speak to the police. (This information is brought to you by Tulsa criminal lawyer Kevin Adams, but this information is helpful to anyone suspected of a crime.)</strong></div><h3 align="center" class="style6">1. INNOCENT PEOPLE DO GO TO PRISON</h3>Many people believe&nbsp;if they have not done anything wrong,&nbsp;they&nbsp;have nothing to worry about. This is not true. In the dissenting opinion of Johnson v. Louisiana, Justice Douglas of the United States Supreme Court wrote: Any person faced with the awesome power of government is in great jeopardy, even though innocent. Facts are always elusive and often two-faced. What may appear to one to imply guilt may carry no such overtones to another. Every criminal prosecution crosses treacherous ground, for guilt is common to all men.<br />Innocent people do go to prison. It can happen to you, your friends or your family. Whether you are innocent or guilty, if you are suspected of a crime, you need to be cautious and contact a criminal defense attorney for help.<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">2. DO NOT GIVE A STATEMENT&nbsp;AND INSIST ON HAVING A LAWYER PRESENT</h3>If there is any indication that you might be suspected of a crime, do not give a statement.&nbsp;Instead, insist on having a lawyer present before you answer any questions. The request should be clear and unmistakable. Be polite but be firm.&nbsp;Say, "I want to talk with a lawyer before I will answer any questions."<br />Do not ask the police if you need a lawyer. They will tell you that you do not. They will try to talk you out of requesting a lawyer. Asking if you need a lawyer is not good enough. You must tell the police in a clear and&nbsp;unmistakable way that you will not answer any questions without having a lawyer present. Do not sign any waivers and stop talking. The police may be very nice to you; this does not mean they are your friends or are trying to help you. You should be polite, but you must be firm. Insist on speaking with&nbsp;a lawyer. Insist on having a lawyer present before you answer any questions. A lawyer will be able to help you deal with the police. A lawyer can tell you whether you are at risk of being charged with a crime. Preferably, you should speak with a criminal defense lawyer.<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">3. YOUR SILENCE CANNOT BE USED AGAINST YOU</h3>Your silence cannot be used against you at a trial. However, even a denial may later be used against you. Sometimes people are afraid and make blanket denials such as, "I don't know what you are talking about,” when they know exactly what the police are talking about. Do not lie to the police; simply say, "I want to talk with a lawyer and have a lawyer present before answering any questions."<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">4. THE POLICE MAY LIE TO YOU</h3>Many people are surprised to learn that the police can lie in order to gain a confession. The police can and do lie to suspects to get them to talk. Do not fall for this. Insist on speaking to a lawyer and having a lawyer present before you answer any questions. Do not let the lies of the police pressure you into making an incriminating statement. Officers might say things such as they have an eyewitness that can identify you, so you might as well tell them what happened. The police might tell you that they have your fingerprints or a videotape. If more than one person is arrested they might tell you that the other person has given a statement implicating you. Do not believe it. Simply ask for a lawyer and do not say anything.<br />There are numerous cases where appellate Courts have upheld confessions that were obtained after the police lied to a suspect. For instance in a case named Amaya-Ruiz v. Stewart the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a confession was admissible even though the police misrepresented the evidence they had against the defendant.<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">5. THE POLICE MAY THREATEN YOU</h3>There are good and bad people in the world and there are good and bad police officers in the world. Some officers will do things that are unconstitutional and wrong. If you find yourself in a situation where an officer is threatening you with physical violence or threatening to charge your family or loved ones with a crime if you do not talk, you should not give in. Renew your request for an attorney.<br />If you do give in out of fear, insist on giving a written statement and start the statement by listing what the officer has done in order to get you to write the statement. For example, "I am only writing this statement because I am in fear for my safety. I feel Officer Smith has repeatedly threatened me by committing the following acts..." If you give in because the officer has threatened to charge your friend or loved one with a crime, write that into the statement. You are much better off never making a statement. But if you do give in out of fear, be sure and write in the statement what has made you give in.<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">6. MIRANDA RIGHTS</h3>Miranda Rights protect individuals who are in custody and being questioned by the police. The police are not required to inform a suspect of his or her Miranda Rights if they are not in custody, or are in custody but are not being questioned by the police.<br />The Miranda decision only applies to statements that are made in response to questioning by the police while a suspect is in custody. Sometimes suspects will tell the police something that is incriminating without the police asking a question or when they are not in custody. These statements cannot be suppressed on the basis that the police failed to read the defendant his or her Miranda Rights.<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">7. NEVER CONSENT TO A SEARCH</h3>Do not consent to a search without first consulting with a lawyer. Whether the police want to search you, your home, or your vehicle the answer should always be no. Be polite but be firm. Do not resist a search. But do not give your consent for a search either.<br />If the police ask you if they can search, "Just say No". By consenting to a search, you are waiving valuable Constitutional rights. Do not give up your rights by giving consent to search. Your refusal to give consent for a search cannot by itself serve as a basis to conduct a&nbsp;search without your consent.<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">8. IF YOU THINK YOU ARE A SUSPECT TALK TO NO ONE BUT A LAWYER</h3>If you think that there is a chance that you are or will become a suspect in a crime, do not discuss the situation with anyone but a lawyer. If you make statements to anyone other than a lawyer, there is a potential those statements will be used against you. Many times a defendant's own statements are the government's best evidence against a defendant.<br /><h3 align="center" class="style6">&nbsp;</h3><h3 align="center" class="style6">9. ASK IF YOU ARE FREE TO LEAVE</h3>If you encounter the police while you are away from your home and the police attempt to question you, ask the officer if you are free to leave. If the officer says that you are free to leave then do so.&nbsp;If the officer says no insist on speaking to an attorney before answering any questions and say nothing more.<br />If the police come to your house in an attempt to question you ask them to leave. Do not continue a conversation with the police if you think you are a suspect in a crime. If the police are at your door attempting to question you, ask them to leave and just shut the door. You do not have to talk to the police and if you are a suspect in a crime you should not talk to the police without speaking with a lawyer first.<br /><div class="style6"><strong>10 .</strong>&nbsp;<strong>SERIOUS ACCUASTIONS REQUIRE SERIOUS LAWYERS</strong></div>If you are suspected of a serious crime, you need a serious lawyer. You should consider hiring a trial lawyer, Even if you are not planning on proceeding to trial you should consider hiring a lawyer with significant jury trial experience. Most of the time there are many opportunities to resolve a criminal case long before it reaches a jury trial. However, there is no guarantee that the prosecutor in your case will see the case from your prospective or offer a resolution that you feel that you can live with. If the prosecutor assigned to your case does not treat you fairly without a trial lawyer representing you proceeding to jury trial may not be a viable option.<br />Here are some questions that will help you determine if the lawyer you are considering hirining is a serious lawyer.</blockquote><ul><li>Has the lawyer had at least 10 jury trial as lead counsel?</li><li>Has the lawyer won any of those trials? If so how many? Will the lawyer give you a list of jury trials they have had so you can verify what they are telling you?</li><li>Does the lawyer go to Federal Court? Whether a criminal lawyer goes to Federal Court is a big dividing line among lawyers.</li><li>Does the lawyer handled criminal appeals?</li><li>Is the lawyer peer rated on&nbsp;<a href="http://www.martindale.com/">Martindale.com</a>?</li><li>Has the lawyer ever handled and death penalty cases?</li><li>Does the lawyer write serious motions or just file "canned" form motions? Ask to see some of the lawyers writings. Is the motion over 2 to 3 pages? Is the lawyer actaully arguing the law and applying the law to the facts? Or is the lawyer just asking the judge to do something without any legal analysis?</li></ul><blockquote><div style="background-color: white;">For more information visit&nbsp;<a href="http://www.oklahomacriminallaw.com/Hiring%20a%20Lawyer.htm" target="_blank">Tips on Hiring a Lawyer</a></div></blockquote><br />Visit <a href="http://oklahomacriminallaw.com/" target="_blank">OklahomaCriminalLaw.com</a> for information about <a href="http://www.oklahomacriminallaw.com/about_kevin.htm" target="_blank">Kevin Adams </a>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2013/12/10-things-everyone-suspected-of-crime.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-5121430835851605675Thu, 23 Jun 2011 17:39:00 +00002011-06-23T10:40:30.275-07:00Time to Change Oklahoma's Marijuana Laws<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; text-align: justify; font: normal normal normal 14px/normal 'Times New Roman'; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><span>It is time for Oklahoma to change the punishment for felony simple possession of marijuana. </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0px; ">Our prisons our overcrowded and we our cutting funding to education, while the taxpayers pay to incarcerate individuals caught with small amounts of marijuana. </span></p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; text-align: justify; font: normal normal normal 14px/normal 'Times New Roman'; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0px; "><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>Over the last 10 years I have witnessed multiple defendants receive multiyear sentences for simple possession of marijuana. </span>It makes no sense to spend our precious resources locking up people convicted of possessing a marijuana joint. We should focus our limited resources incarcerating those we are afraid of, not those we are mad at. </p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; text-align: justify; font: normal normal normal 14px/normal 'Times New Roman'; color: rgb(66, 69, 64); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><span><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0px; ">In Oklahoma, first time simple possession of marijuana is a misdemeanor. The second simple possession of marijuana is a felony punishable up to 10 years in prison.</span></p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; text-align: justify; font: normal normal normal 14px/normal 'Times New Roman'; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0px; "><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>The first felony offense DUI only carries a term of imprisonment of up to 5 years in prison. Every year over 200 people are killed in Oklahoma by drunk drivers and zero deaths result from smoking marijuana. So why does felony possession of marijuana carry twice as much time as felony DUI? </span></p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; text-align: justify; font: normal normal normal 14px/normal 'Times New Roman'; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0px; "><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>The punishment for aggravated assault and battery, which has a requirement of great bodily injury, only carries up to 5 years in prison. So under the current law an individual who commits aggravated assault causing great bodily injury only faces up to 5 years and an individual caught with a marijuana cigarette faces 10 years. <span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span></span></p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; text-align: justify; font: normal normal normal 14px/normal 'Times New Roman'; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0px; "><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre; "> </span>Every time someone is incarcerated for simple possession there is less money available to educate our children., build roads and provide public service. </span></p>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2011/06/time-to-change-oklahomas-marijuana-laws.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-4776411390053224426Wed, 22 Jun 2011 03:38:00 +00002011-06-21T20:43:02.171-07:00Ideas to Improve The Oklahoma Justice System<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540">Below are a number of ideas that I have that I believe would improve the state of Oklahoma an improve our state. Some people may be surprised that these ideas come from a criminal defense lawyer, however I believe all of these ideas would benefit the both defendants and the general public alike. </p><p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b>Changes to DUI Punishment</b></span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Every year Oklahoma has over 200 deaths that result from drinking and driving. While this number represents an improvement over the amount of deaths our state had 25 years ago, it is still a staggering number. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Our state will never be able to eliminate all deaths from drinking and driving, but I believe there is a simple change to our statutes that will help reduce the deaths from drinking and driving even further. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>In the decade that I have been practicing criminal law I have represented individuals responsible for the death of 10 people while drinking and driving. Our statutes punish those that kill others while drinking and driving harshly and I believe that harsh treatment for DUI Manslaughter offenders represents good public policy. However, since people that kill others while drinking and driving do not intend to kill people, I believe that the punishment for all DUI offenders should be increased to deter the behavior that leads to these deaths. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Presently, under Oklahoma law the sentencing range for first time DUI is 10 days to 1 year in the county jail. (See Title 47 O.S. Section 11-902) However, it is my experience that very few first time DUI offenders ever spend anytime in the county jail. I believe that it is commonly known among individuals that frequent bars and drink and drive regularly, that even if they are arrested they will not spend anytime in jail. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>My suggestion is that the range of punishment be modified to require all first time DUI and DWI offenders to spend a weekend in jail. It is my suggestion that if the law made it clear that if an individual is convicted of DUI or DWI, that even a first time offender, will be required to spend a weekend in county jail that it would have a great deterrent effect on the number of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">DUIs</span> in our state. The statute would have to be clear that the weekend in the county jail could not be suspended under any circumstances. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I believe that if this change was made in the statute, that it would not take long for the word to spread and our state would see a decrease in the amount of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">DUIs</span> and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">DWIs</span>. I would hope that with this change in the statute that our state could finally get below 200 drinking and driving deaths a year. (In 2008 there were 266 deaths and in 2009 there were 209 deaths.) </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>By making jail time a certainty for even first time DUI and DWI offenders I believe that we would reduce the behavior and therefore reduce drinking and driving deaths. The statute could require the cost of the weekend incarceration to be charged to the offenders as part of the cost of the case, so that the local county jails are not burdened with new expenses. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I believe this small change in the statute would reduce drinking and driving, reduce drinking and driving deaths, save the tax payers money and deter many individuals from long prison sentences by changing their behavior before it results in tragedy. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b>Changes to the Prescription System </b> </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Every year dozens of individuals are arrested for obtaining prescription by fraud. Currently, I am representing an individual in federal court that is charged with a conspiracy to distribute <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">oxycodone</span>. That case involved drugs received through forged prescriptions. In that case the United States Attorney’s Office believes that 35,000 <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">oxycodone</span> pills were obtained in a matter of months through forgery. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>In the case I am involved in the ringleader simply printed up the prescriptions using a computer and a printer. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Common sense dictates that for every individual that is caught obtaining prescription by fraud that there are a number of others that are not discovered. Prescription forgery is a large source of illegal drugs in our communities and it also results in the arrests and convictions of numerous individuals that we then have to bear the expense of prosecuting and incarcerating. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>It would be easy to change the system to eliminate this problem. If the state adopted a requirement that all narcotic prescriptions require contact directly from the doctor’s office in order for the pharmacy to fill the prescription, than it would eliminate the ability for individuals to forge these types of prescriptions. The process could be mad even more secure by requiring a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">passcode</span> from the doctor’s office to be given to the pharmacy before the narcotic prescription could be filled. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b>Changes to the Knowingly Concealing Stolen Property Statute</b> </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Under Oklahoma law it is a felony for an individual to receive stolen property. (See Title 21 O.S. Section 1713) Clearly this behavior should be against the law. However, the statute does not have a dollar value attached to the statute. In other property crimes there is a threshold value amount before the behavior becomes a felony. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>For example under the embezzlement statute that will go into effect on November 1, 2011 (See Title 21 O.S. Section 1451) if the value of the property embezzled is less that $500 than the offense is a misdemeanor. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>For another example the crime of larceny of merchandise from a retailer (Title 21 O.S. Section 1731) for a first time offender who steals less than $500 worth of merchandise the crime is a misdemeanor. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The absence of a dollar value being attached to the Knowingly Stealing Stolen Property statute can led to absurd results. For example lets say one individual steals an <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">iPod</span> from a local store and sells it to another individual. Under the current law the individual that steals the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">IPod</span> is guilty of a misdemeanor and the individual that buys the stolen <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">IPod</span> is guilty of a felony. It makes more sense to attach a monetary value to the stolen property that is received before it becomes a felony. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b>Changes to the Judicial Modification Statute </b></span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></b>Title 22 O.S. Section 982a allows a sentencing judge to modify the sentence imposed any time within (12) months after the sentence was imposed “if the court is satisfied the best interests of the public will not be jeopardized.” In 2010 the legislature modified this statute to include the following language “</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px color: #000000">Further, without the consent of the district attorney, this section shall not apply to sentences imposed pursuant to a plea agreement.” </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span> In principal I agree that a defendant should not reach be allowed to enter into a plea agreement with the state and then be able to return to court within a year and ask the judge to impose another sentence without the agreement of the state. However, when a judge gives a sentence after a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">Pre</span>-Sentence Investigation Report (PSI), it makes sense to give the judge the authority to set a judicial review at the time of sentencing. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>There are different types of plea agreements that defendants enter into with the prosecution. Sometimes a defendant and the prosecution will agree that a defendant will serve a number of years in the Department of Corrections. Other times the agreement will be to a term of years and whether the sentence imposed is incarceration, a suspended sentence or a deferred sentence is up to the judge after the judge has had an opportunity to review the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">pre</span>-sentence investigation report. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>A few month back, because of the changed statute, I witnessed a Tulsa County Judge sentence a defendant to less time in prison because the state would not agree to a judicial review. In the case I witnessed the individual was involved with a robbery and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">pled</span> to a 8 year term to be determined after a PSI. (A plea agreement of this type would be referred to as an “8 PSI”.) The judge wanted to sentence the defendant to a term of 8 years in prison and bring the defendant back for a judicial review after a year and if the defendant was doing well then consider a modification. The prosecutor would not agree to a judicial review so the judge gave the defendant 2 years in prison and 6 years probation. So in this case, because the change in the law the defendant potentially spent less time in prison. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Often times a judge will sentence a defendant to the entire period of time in prison called for in the agreement and set a judicial review to see how the defendant is doing in prison. This provides a powerful motivation for a defendant to change their behavior and to take advantage of as many programs as they can while in DOC. This type of sentence helps the process of rehabilitation and helps reduce recidivism rates. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>It makes good sense to tweak the statute to allow a judge that imposes a sentence, that is a result of a “PSI” plea agreement, to set a judicial review at the time of sentencing. Most of the judges in our state are very experienced and through their experience have gained a good understanding of how to motivate an individual to change. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b>Establish Requirements for Death Penalty Counsel </b> </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px color: #000000"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Federal statutes require that when a defendant is charged with a capital offense that the Court shall assign “</span><span style="font: 14.0px Times; letter-spacing: 0.0px color: #000000">2 such counsel, of whom at least 1 shall </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">be learned in the law applicable to capital cases.” (see 18 <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">USC</span> Section 3005) Death penalty cases are complex and more difficulty than any other type of case that a defense counsel will ever handle. These cases require an experienced attorney to handle them effectively. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Death penalty trials are very expensive and traumatic for all parties involved. Death penalty verdicts are reversed at a higher percentage than any other type of sentence, both in the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals and in Federal Court. The state has a legitimate interest in ensuring that these cases are done right the first time. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>On multiple occasions the issue of unqualified counsel handling death penalty cases has arisen in Tulsa County. The last time the issue arose, I had communication with members of the Tulsa County District Attorney’s office about the issue. The district attorneys I spoke with did not want to see the case continue to trial with an unqualified attorney representing a defendant that may receive a sentence of death. Fortunately, in the case I am referencing the unqualified attorney decided that she was unqualified and withdrew. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>However, I know of cases where unqualified attorneys continued to represent defendants facing the death penalty for various reasons. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I suggest that the state establish requirements for attorneys in death penalty cases. My suggestion is that the state law go past the requirements of the federal statute and require minimum qualifications for attorneys that are appointed or retained. Whether in favor or opposed to the death penalty we all have an interest in ensuring the trials are done right the first time. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b>Change in the Punishment for Simple Possession of Marijuana </b></span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></b>Under Oklahoma law the first time simple possession of marijuana is a misdemeanor. However, also under Oklahoma law the second and subsequent simple possession of marijuana is enhanced to a felony and is punishable by from 2 to 10 years in the state penitentiary. (See </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px color: #000000">Title 63 O.S. 2-402 (B)(2).) </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>However, there is some confusion in the law regarding whether or not the second and subsequent possession of marijuana can be enhanced under the habitual offender act. (See Title 21 O.S. Section 51.1) Those that believe that the second a subsequent possession of marijuana can be enhanced believe that you can enhance the offense from a misdemeanor to a felony by proving the prior conviction for possession of marijuana and then enhance the sentencing range from 2 to 10 years to 4 to 20 years by proving a separate prior felony conviction. Under this interpretation our state could potentially pay to incarcerate some defendants for up to 20 year sentence for possession of a single joint of marijuana. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Admittedly a defendant sentenced to 20 years for simple possession of marijuana would only serve 7 or 8 years, but the sentence alone would cost the tax payers well over $100,000. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>It is my belief that a conviction for the second and subsequent possession of marijuana always carries from 2 to 10 years. Some judges in Tulsa County agree with me and other judges do not. I’m aware of no case in which the Court of Criminal Appeals has addressed this issue. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Regardless of which position a lawyer or judge takes regarding the appropriate punishment range under this statute both sides would agree that ambiguity in the law is not a good thing. Removing this ambiguity in the law would improve the system. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>However, modification of the punishment range for felony simple possession of marijuana would make sense. Under Oklahoma law DUI is a misdemeanor for the first offense and a felony for the second. However, the second offense DUI only carries a term of imprisonment of up to 5 years in prison. A second felony offense (third DUI offense counting the misdemeanor conviction) for DUI carries a sentence from 1 to 10 years in prison. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The punishment for aggravated assault and battery, which has a statutory requirement of great bodily injury, carries a punishment range of 0 to 5 years in prison. (See Title 21 OS 646 and 647) And and the recently passed statute that goes into effect on November 1, 2011 anyone convicted of domestic assault and battery with a dangerous weapon can be punished up to 10 years in prison. (See Title 21 OS Section 644) </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Under our statutes the simple possession of marijuana (second offense) can send you to prison longer than your first felony DUI, as long as your second felony DUI, twice as long than if you committed aggravated assault and battery with great bodily injury upon someone, and as long as you could receive for domestic assault and battery by dangerous weapon. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The punishment range of simple possession of marijuana simply does not fit the crime. In these tough economic times it does not make sense to incarcerate an individuals for years for the simple possession of a marijuana joint. I have witnessed multiple defendants receive multiyear sentences for simple possession of marijuana. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>I would suggest that the punishment range of up to a year in county jail and a felony conviction would be a more appropriate range of punishment for second and subsequent convictions of simple possession of marijuana. This range of punishment would save the state hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars a year, by removing the cost of state imprisonment for those individuals caught with a small quantity of marijuana for second and subsequent times. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Second time offenders would still become convicted felons, they would just be incarcerated in the county jail instead of the state prison system. </span></p>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2011/06/ideas-to-improve-oklahoma-justice.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-3766925382316109594Sat, 11 Jun 2011 14:30:00 +00002011-06-11T07:32:19.025-07:00"To Catch Bad Guy"<p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">Over the last two weeks I have spent as much time as possible watching the trial of former Tulsa Police Officer Harold Wells, and current Tulsa Police Officers Bruce Bonham and Nick Debruin. As the defense began to put on their case I was struck by how often the two defendants that testified and the officers the called to testify on their behalf said the phrase “bad guy”. </span></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; min-height: 14px; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"></span><br /></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">During Nick Debruin’s testimony he testified that he went to work on May 18, 2009 “To catch a bad guy”. Bonham made a reference to houses where “bad guys lived” in his testimony. Various other officers that were called to testify about one issue or the next also used the phrase “bad guy”. </span></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; min-height: 14px; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"></span><br /></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">The job of the police is to “uphold the law”, not to “catch bad guys”. The difference between the two perspectives is when an officer focusing on “upholding the law” the officer is focused upon maintaining and improving the system. When an officer focuses on catching “bad guys” the officer is focused on an individual and not the system. </span></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; min-height: 14px; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"></span><br /></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">Even the reference another being a “bad guy” indicates that the one making that statement is a “good guy” and that becomes the problem. At the core of all human cruelty is a sense of self-righteousness. </span></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; min-height: 14px; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"></span><br /></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">If you look back over the course of human history you can see that time and time again whenever horrific cruelties were inflicted, the people committing those cruelties believed they were better than those they inflicted the cruelties upon. The examples are endless. Take slavery for example, the slave holders and the slave merchants believed that those the were enslaving were less than human. The same thing with the treatment of the Native Americans. It is the same story Nazi German, the former Yugoslavia, Bosnia and every other war crime. </span></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; min-height: 14px; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"></span><br /></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">It is all about self-righteousness. Once an individual decides that they themselves are good and their opponent is bad, it becomes easier and easier to justify doing what ever it takes to defeat that opponent. These self-righteous justifications erode the criminal justice system. </span></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; min-height: 14px; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"></span><br /></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">If as a society we want to improve our justice system and ensure that we remain a nation of laws and not a nation of men, than we must ensure that the men and women that work in law enforcement keep in mind that their job is to uphold the law and not “catch bad guys”. </span></p> <p style="text-align: justify;margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font: normal normal normal 12px/normal Helvetica; min-height: 14px; "><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"></span><br /></p>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2011/06/to-catch-bad-guy.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-6548471474935867660Mon, 06 Jun 2011 13:33:00 +00002011-06-06T06:35:44.182-07:00Lack of Money is Forcing Reason and Common Sense<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Oklahoma routinely ranks in the top five (5) for incarceration rates of men and has the highest incarceration rate for women in the nation. Recently the Oklahoma Legislature passed House Bill 2131 a piece of legislation designed to reduce Oklahoma’s exploding prison population. Presently Oklahoma incarcerates 26,000 people. (According to the latest census the towns of Claremore, OK and Jenks, OK have a combined population of almost 26,000) At a time when Oklahoma is cutting the amount of money the state is spending on public education the state spent almost 500 million dollars last year incarcerating its citizens. (More than half of Oklahoma’s prison population is nonviolent offenders.) </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>House Bill 2131 increases the eligibility for community sentencing and GPS monitoring. These two measures will save the tax payers money and reduce the incarceration rate if these alternatives are imposed instead of incarceration. How wide spread the use of these sentencing alternatives will be is an open question. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>If the legislature really wants to control the cost of the prison system it should reduce the discretion in the hands of the district attorneys and the judges. In Tulsa County the district attorney’s office files around 5,000 felony cases a year. Many of the prosecutors are young and fresh out of law school. Just one young prosecutor who is over zealous can cost the state hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars in unnecessary prison cost. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>For example lets say over a year period a young prosecutor, who is attempting to make a name for himself, sends 100 people to prison for 1 year longer than they really need to go to prison. That would cost the state of Oklahoma just over 2 million dollars. A judge that is seeking re-election or just wants to get “tough on crime” can cost the state even more. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Every year the legislature is required to come up with the money to cover all the checks written by inexperienced prosecutors, those young and inexperienced prosecutors have no business making decisions that can cost the tax payers of this state millions and millions of dollars. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>There are offenses that have guideline ranges like zero to life. There are other offenses with guideline ranges such as four years to life or five years to life. Even first time simple possession of a controlled dangerous substance carries from two to ten years. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>The Oklahoma Legislature should take control of the sentencing ranges so the legislature can better control the prison budget and make better use of tax payer’s money. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>My preference would be that the members of the Oklahoma Legislature realize the immorality of spending tax payer money to incarcerating large groups of its nonviolent citizens and that politicians would wisely use tax payer funds to incarcerate those we are afraid of not those we are mad at. When the school children return to school in the fall, I would love to see a larger percentage of the state budget spent on educating them and a smaller percentage would be spent on incarcerating their parents, because it was the right thing to do. </span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 12.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 14.0px 'Times New Roman'; color: #424540"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>However, like everything else it comes down to the money. Tax payer money will continue to be squandered until the citizens of this state demand that the legislature stop</span></p>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2011/06/lack-of-money-is-forcing-reason-and.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-8408792972692702922Mon, 06 Jun 2011 03:03:00 +00002011-06-05T20:04:03.785-07:00The Conspirator<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">Last week, my wife and I went to see the movie The Conspirator. It is a powerful movie dealing with the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, as well as the legal aftermath that followed. The story focused on the prosecution--and eventual execution--of Mary Surratt. Surratt owned a boarding house that was frequented by John Wilkes Booth and others that planned the assassination of Lincoln.</span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">After the assassination, the Government decided that it needed to try the co-conspirators in military tribunals. The commission was made up of generals from the north (as the Civil War is just winding down). Surratt and her family were southerners. Since the Constitution did not apply to the tribunals, Surratt was even forbidden to testify on her own behalf.</span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">There is much about the assassination of Lincoln that I did not know, and since it is a movie I do not know whether the facts were portrayed accurately or not. However, I am very familiar with the story. I have seen the story time and time again. An unpopular defendant, prosecuted in a negative environment, and the Government ignoring the constitution to achieve the desired outcome.</span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">There are many parallels between what happened in the movie and what happened in our country after 9/11. Unfortunately, it does not take a national tragedy to see those who swore to uphold the Constitution completely disregard it to accomplish a desired political outcome. The Constitution is ignored on a daily basis in courtrooms all over this country.</span></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">If you have not seen The Conspirator, I highly recommend it.</span></p>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2011/06/conspirator.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-2922986129475294265Tue, 03 Aug 2010 00:12:00 +00002010-08-02T17:20:40.249-07:00Tulsa Police CorruptionI have been working on some cases involving the Tulsa Police Corruption. I am working to free some clients that have been wrongfully convicted. When I think about the scope of this corruption it is just overwhelming. How many defendants were sent to prison that should not have been? How many children grew up without parents? How many parents and grandparents missed out on birthdays and holidays because of these corrupt police officers? How many loved ones never got the chance to hold the one they love one last time before they passed?<br /><br />What would it be like knowing that someone you loved and cared about died and you could not even make it to the funeral? To know that your loved one died without knowing that you were innocent and were framed by the police?<br /><br />What would it be like to try and explain to your child that you had to go to prison for something you did not do?<br /><br />The corruption is unbelievable. Depressing really. I used to take a lot of pride in being involved in the legal profession. Not so much anymore. No wander people trust used car salesmen at about the same rate as lawyers.<br /><br />I just don't understand how things could have ever got this bad. I wander if it is this way everywhere or if we can ever make a difference.<br /><br />I heard a story about a little girl that was running up and down a beach after a bad storm. There were a hundreds of star fish on the beach out of the water. The little girl was running frantically picking up star fish to throw them back in the water so they would not die. A man was walking his dog along the beach and he asked the girl what she was doing. She said I am throwing the star fish back so they won't die. The man said it is no use you will never make a difference there are too many star fish. The little girl picked up a star fish and threw it into the water, she looked at the man and said "I made a difference to that one."<br /><br />I used to be that little girl just happy to make a difference to one client at a time. But lately more and more I feel like the man. Maybe I am just feeling overwhelmed.http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2010/08/tulsa-police-corruption.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-2285087918467705730Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:06:00 +00002010-06-15T05:11:20.026-07:00Another Corrupt Tulsa Police Officer Pleads GuiltyYesterday, John K Gray, Tulsa Police Officer, <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" class="blsp-spelling-error">pled</span> guilty to taking money from an undercover sting in May of 2009. Gray was the target of the sting and the FBI had video of Gray pocketing the money. In his plea <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">agreement</span> Gray implicated 3 other officers. This is bad news for corrupt Tulsa Police officers that are currently being investigated. From what I hear Gray is <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" class="blsp-spelling-corrected">cooperating</span> and naming names.http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2010/06/another-corrupt-tulsa-police-officer.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-2053406420516216270Sat, 22 May 2010 15:46:00 +00002010-05-22T09:05:42.310-07:00Another Conviction Overturned Due to Police Corruption<p> </p><p align="justify">The Tulsa World reported today that another Federal inmate was ordered released as a result of the ongoing police corruption investigation in Tulsa. This release brings the total to six Federal inmates that have been released. Below is the link to the article. </p><p align="justify">This release extends the alleged corruption back to 2004. In a pleading filed into this case there was an affidavit attached by Rochelle Martin a long time informant for TPD Officer Jeff Henderson. In that affidavit Martin claims that Officer Henderson and Officer Yelton coached her to lie under oath concerning the existence of a claimed confidential informant. </p><p align="justify">Whatever evidence US Attorney Jane Duke has, it was strong enough for the Justice Department to request the release of Bobby Haley. I know from personal experience they are not doing this with every case that there is a problem with. </p><p align="justify">Now in this investigation 4 law enforcement officers have be publicly implicated. Former ATF agent Brandon McFadden (who has pled guilty and is cooperating), TPD officer John K. Gray (He has been suspended and it is believed he is "TPD Officer B" in the McFadden indictment), TPD officer Jeff Henderson (He has been suspended and it is believed he is "TPD officer A" in the McFadden indictment) and now TPD officer Bill Yelton (Identified in the Rochelle Martin affidavit.) </p><p align="justify">How deep (and wide) will this investigation go? </p><p><a href="http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&amp;articleid=20100522_11_A1_Afifth352220">http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&amp;articleid=20100522_11_A1_Afifth352220</a></p>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2010/05/another-conviction-overturned-due-to.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-2362169236757770674Sat, 22 May 2010 15:30:00 +00002010-05-22T08:33:23.618-07:00Settlement of Lawsuit Good for Tulsa<div align="justify">On Wednesday May 19th Federal Judge Terrence Kern approved the settlement of the long standing racial discrimination lawsuit filed originally over 15 years ago. The settlement has two provisions that will help curb the corruption that has existed in the Tulsa police department for years.<br />The first provision is a cap of 15 years on special assignments. The reason the plaintiffs in the racial-discrimination lawsuit want this provision is to open more slots for minority officers. There is another benefit. The 15 year cap will break up some of the corruption that now exists in the Tulsa Police Department. When a particular unit or division of the department has officers that have been there for years and years it creates an atmosphere that allows corruption to grow and thrive. When there is very little turnover and officers know each other well there is little concern that a fellow officer is going to disprove of a corrupt officers actions, much less report the behavior.<br />Currently there is a Federal investigation of police corruption in the Tulsa Police Department. The investigation involves officers lying under oath, planting drugs on suspects, stealing money, committing perjury during jury trials and other hearings and making up confidential informants. Many officers in the areas that are being investigated, especially the leadership, have been in those divisions too long. This policy change will have a positive unintended consequence of breaking up corruption.<br />The other part of the settlement is the requirement that TPD purchase and maintain cameras in the police units. This will help cut down on corruption and streamline the process in the court proceedings. There will no longer be a question of whether probable cause exists to stop someone , this is a great policy change that should have occurred years ago.<br />These policy changes are good for the citizens of Tulsa and those accused of crimes. Louis Bullock should be congratulated for the fine work he has done on this case. </div>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2010/05/settlement-of-lawsuit-good-for-tulsa.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-4701467050691485571Wed, 12 May 2010 12:17:00 +00002010-05-12T05:37:33.840-07:00Take The Nickel<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DJUO_c3mU2o/S-qdbajLUCI/AAAAAAAAACE/0lTQdzONpGw/s1600/nickel.png"><img style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 320px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 253px; CURSOR: hand" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5470357791703781410" border="0" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_DJUO_c3mU2o/S-qdbajLUCI/AAAAAAAAACE/0lTQdzONpGw/s320/nickel.png" /></a><br /><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">"...make no statement to the police under any circumstances."</span></strong><br /><div align="justify"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-size:180%;"><span style="font-size:78%;"> </span></span></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="font-size:85%;"> - U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson<br /><br /></span>The worst thing that someone suspected of a crime can do is give a statement to the police. Often time the most damning evidence a prosecutor has against someone is that person's own statement. </div><br /><br /><div align="justify">As former United States Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson stated "...any lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances." <em>Watts v. Indiana, 338 U.S. 49, 59</em>. </div><br /><br /><div align="justify">Modern day criminal law is so complex and complicated that it is impossible for someone to know what factual circumstances may implicate them in a crime. As written by United States Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer in<em> Ruben v. United States, 524 U.S. 1301 (1998);</em> </div><br /><br /><br /><div align="justify"><em>"the complexity of modern federal criminal law, codified in several thousand sections of the United States Code and the virtually infinite variety of factual circumstances that might trigger an investigation into a possible violation of the law, make it difficult for anyone to know, in advance, just when a particular set of statements might later appear (to a prosecutor) to be relevant to some such investigation." </em></div><br /><br /><div align="center"><br /><strong>Why Would you Snitch on Yourself? </strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong> </div><div align="justify">Even people that would never consider "snitching" on someone else will “snitch” on themselves without thinking twice about it. If you would not "snitch" one someone else than why would you "snitch" on yourself? If the police attempt to question you, the best thing you can do is exercise your 5th Amendment Right to Remain Silent....or as I like to say "<strong>Take the Nickel</strong>". </div><br /><br /><br /><div align="center"><strong>Do Not Be Intimidated Into Giving Up Your Rights </strong></div><div align="justify"><br />Many people give up their right to remain silent and/or their right not to consent to a search because they are intimidated. Police encounters can be a scary event but, being charged with a crime when the prosecution has the evidence it needs to convict you and send you to prison is even scarier. </div><div align="justify"><br />Other people give up their rights because they were raised to believe that the police are their friends and that the police are there to help them. If you are suspected of a crime even the most honest and friendly officer is talking to you to get the evidence the government needs to prosecute you. </div><div align="justify"><br />Whether you are intimidated by the police or were raised to believe the police are your friends, do not give up your valuable constitutional rights by talking to the police or consenting to a search. If the police attempt to question you simply tell them that “I choose to remain silent”. If the police want to search you or your property, tell them “I do not consent to searches”.<br /></div><div align="center"><strong></strong> </div><div align="center"><strong>Never Consent to a Search </strong></div><strong></strong><div align="justify"><br />Do not ever consent to a search. Whether the police want to search you, your home, or your vehicle the answer should always be NO! Be polite but, be firm. Do not physically resist a search but, make it clear (verbally) that “ I do not consent to searches.”<br /><br /></div><strong></strong><div align="center"><strong>The Police May Legally Lie to You</strong> </div><div align="justify"><br />Many people are surprised to learn that the police can lie in order to gain a confession. The police are trained to lie to those suspected of crimes. Do not let the lies of the police pressure you into talking to them. Simply ask for a lawyer and tell the police you are not going to make a statement. Just “<strong>Take the Nickel</strong>”. </div><div align="center"><br /><strong></strong> </div><div align="center"><strong>Even If You Have Done Nothing Wrong "Take the Nickel" </strong></div><div align="center"><strong></strong> </div><div align="justify">Many people believe if they have not done anything wrong, they have nothing to worry about. This is not true. In the dissenting opinion of Johnson v. Louisiana, United States Supreme Court Justice William Douglas wrote: </div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"><em>"Any person faced with the awesome power of government is in great jeopardy, even though innocent. Facts are always elusive and often two-faced. What may appear to one to imply guilt may carry no such overtones to another. Every criminal prosecution crosses treacherous ground, for guilt is common to all men." </em></div><p align="center"><br /><strong>Talking With The Police Will Not Help You with the Prosecutor</strong> </p><p align="justify">Often police lie to people and say that it will help them with the prosecutor if they tell their side of the story. This is not true. Prosecutors offer the best deals when their case is weak. If a defendant gives a statement to the police and admits guilt, there is little motivation for the prosecutor to resolve the case favorably. </p><p align="justify"><br />Asking “Do I need a lawyer” is not good enough. You must tell the police in a clear and unmistakable way that you will not answer any questions without having a lawyer present. Do not sign any waivers and stop talking. You should be polite but, you must be firm.<br /></p><p align="center"><strong>Ask If You Are Free To Leave</strong> </p><p align="justify">If you encounter the police while you are away from your home and the police attempt to question you, ask the officer "am I free to leave"? If the officer says that you are free to leave then do so. If the officer says no, tell the officer “I would like to speak to a lawyer before answering any questions” and say nothing more. </p><p align="justify"><br />If the police come to your home in an attempt to question you ask them to leave. If the police are at your door attempting to question you, ask them to leave and just shut the door. If the police knock on your door and attempt to question you, do not invite the police into your home. </p><p align="center"><br /><strong>Your Silence Cannot Be Used Against You</strong> </p><p align="justify">The fact that someone exercises their 5th Amendment right cannot be used to make the look guilty. Your silence can not be used to arrest you, nor can your silence be used to gain a search warrant. Do not lie to the police; simply say, "I want to talk with a lawyer and have a lawyer present before answering any questions." </p>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2010/05/take-nickel.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-8278227633204685314Fri, 02 Apr 2010 04:05:00 +00002010-04-01T21:15:20.963-07:00The Crumbs of JusticeI am tired of seeing corrupt police officers and dishonest prosecutors robbing our citizens of justice. I am tired of looking up at the dinner table of justice waiting for a scrap of justice to fall to the floor. I do not know how things work in other states because I have not practiced there but, there is definitely a culture of corruption around here. <br /><br />I wish I understood why. I wish I knew how to fix the system but, I don't. Case after case I see self-righteous prosecutors and judges that refuse to follow the rules that protect us all, because they have determined that my client is not worthy. It is not about the evidence in a particular case. It is not about what my client may or may not have done that they are accused of; it is about who the prosecutor and judge believes my client to be. Unfortunately, integrity is often the first victim of self-righteousness. <br /><br />I am tired of just getting the scraps of justice, I am hungry for the full meal. I guess I will just have to keep fighting.http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2010/04/crumbs-of-justice.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-1675711384880120816Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:34:00 +00002010-01-04T18:52:44.267-08:00What to expect if charged with an alcohol related driving offense in Oklahoma<strong>I WAS ARRESTED FOR AN ALCOHOL RELATED DRIVING OFFENSE; NOW WHAT? </strong><br /><br />Alcohol related driving offenses are one of the most common criminal offenses seen in the judicial system. Most people who are arrested for an alcohol related driving offense are people that made a mistake, want to work out the best plea agreement they can and move on with their life; for the people in that category, listed below is an overview of what you can expect if you are charged with first offense DUI, DWI or APC in the state of Oklahoma. <br /><br />When you are arrested for DUI, DWI or APC you essentially have two cases to deal with, not one. You have the criminal charges that must be resolved in either municipal or state court and you have the issue of receiving a modified driver's license that must be handled with the Department of Public Safety. This article will address the criminal case first. <br /><br /><strong>WHAT A FIRST OFFENDER CAN EXPECT WHEN CHARGED WITH DUI, DWI OR APC</strong><br /><br />Will I be sentenced to jail? <br /><br />In the vast majority of cases the answer is no. Most jurisdictions in the state realize that they simply do not have the resources to incarcerate first time DUI/DWI/APC offenders. First time offenders in and around Tulsa rarely are sentenced to jail for a first offense DUI/DWI/APC. I would hesitate to say never, but feel comfortable saying that it almost never happens. (A big exception to first time offenders not facing jail time is Washington County, it is my understanding that first time offenders in Washington County are routinely sentenced to jail time of 7 days.) <br /><br />If I pled guilty what will I be expected to do?<br /><br />The short answer is a lot. DUI, DWI and APC cases are so common that in most jurisdictions the prosecutor's office has a "standard recommendation" for first time offenders Listed below is a standard recommendation that someone could expect for a first time DUI in Tulsa County. <br /><br />• 1 Year Suspended Sentence (A defendant is on probation and does not go to jail as long as they don't violate the terms of the probation which includes not violating and state or local laws.)<br /><br />• $250 Fine<br /><br />• $125 Victim's Compensation Fund<br /><br />• DA Supervision (Requires a Defendant to pay the DA's Office $40 a month)<br /><br />• 56 work hours (A defendant is typically allowed to purchase 40 work hours for $320 which means the defendant only has to perform 16 work hours.) <br /><br />• Obtain a Drug and Alcohol Assessment and follow any recommendations. (A defendant will have to attend either a 10 hour or a 24 hours school.) <br /><br />• Victim Impact Panel <br /><br />This is a standard recommendation for first time offenders charged with DUI in Tulsa county. It is only a recommendation (Which means it is the plea offer that the prosecutor extends to the defendant) a defendant always has the option of a jury trial or a "blind plea". A "blind plea" is a plea made to the judge without a plea agreement with the state. With a blind plea the defendant can receive a more lenient sentence or a more severe sentence. Recently the Tulsa County District Attorney's office has changed their policy and has stopped offering deferred sentences or reductions to DWI or Reckless Driving for those charged with first offense DUI. <br />I am told that the reason the Tulsa county District Attorney's office has adopted this policy is because of a rash of recent DUI Manslaughter cases. (Within the last 2 years, I have personally represented 4 separate individuals accused of causing the death of a total of 9 people in DUI Manslaughter cases.) <br /><br />In Tulsa county in cases that are not egregious many defendants are blind pleading their DUI cases to the judge and obtaining a better outcome than the standard recommendation of the Tulsa county District Attorney's office. In those cases the defendants are receiving deferred sentences. However, blind pleas must be approached cautiously; because the judge could sentence the defendant up to the maximum allowed by law. (Which for DUI is a year in the county jail.)<br /><br />The standard recommendation of the Tulsa County District Attorney's office is pretty typical. The one down side to that recommendation is that the Tulsa county District Attorney's office wants suspended sentence for misdemeanor DUI and will not offer reductions to DWI or a deferred. The reason is that first time DUIs are misdemeanors, but a second subsequent offense within 10 years is a felon. In short the district attorney's office wants a conviction so that if a defendant gets another DUI conviction within a ten year period it can be charged as a felony offense.<br /><br />One of the upsides to the standard recommendation in Tulsa County is that they only require 56 work hours of which a defendant can purchase 40 hours for $320. This means if a defendant has the money they only have to perform 16 work hours. Other counties are not as lenient on work hours. For example if you are charged with a first time DUI in Rogers County their standard recommendation will include 120 work hours. (That is 4 weeks working full time.) The requirement of 120 work hours in Rogers county is pretty engrained, it is even pre-printed in their plea packet. <br /><br />Most counties are going to require the DA Supervision for misdemeanors. DA Supervision is kind of like having a probation officer, but not really. The DA's office is not likely to show up at your home or anything like that however, they do want their monthly fee. Basically it is an additional funding source for the DA's office. Most of the local District Attorney's offices did not even have a DA Supervision program until the legislature began cutting their budgets. <br /><br />Many of the requirements of the standard recommendations are statutorily required. For example a defendant receiving a drug and alcohol assessment and following the recommendations is required by statute. (See Title 47 O.S. § 11-902 (G)) Attending of a Victim Impact Panel is required by statute. (See Title 47 O.S. § 11-902 (H)) A payment to the Victim Compensation Fund is statutorily required. ( Title 22 O.S. § 142.18) <br /><br />Should I spend the extra money and hire someone that "Specializes" in DUI cases?<br /><br />The hiring of a lawyer is a personal decision to be made by each defendant. The Oklahoma Bar Association does have a brochure with information to assist the public in making that decision. Click here to see that brochure. It should also be noted that Oklahoma does not recognize "Specialties" in law, except for Maritime Law and Patent Law. (See Title 5 O.S. § Rule 7.4) <br /><br />My opinion is that for most people charged with DUI offenses that hiring someone that holds themselves out to be a DUI Specialist will only cost a defendant more money to get the same deal. The reason that I hold this opinion is that DUI, DWI and APC charges are so common that most prosecuting agencies have standard recommendations that they extend to most defendants. From time to time a lawyer will be able to negotiate more favorable conditions in a plea agreement or know when to advise a defendant that they may want to consider a "blind plea", but with the majority of alcohol related driving offenses defendants are going to end up with substantially the same deal. In my experience the differences in the plea agreements seen have more to do with the jurisdiction the individual is charged in than with the lawyer who is representing them. My opinion is shared several other lawyers that I know. <br /><br />WHAT A FIRST OFFENDER CAN EXPECT WHEN DEALING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY <br /><br />When arrested for DUI, DWI, or APC a defendant's license will be confiscated and that person will typically be given an affidavit that requires a temporary license. What is important to know that if you are arrested for DUI, DWI or APC that the Department of Public Safety will suspend your license for a period of time. However, in most circumstance you can request a modified license. (You can also request a hearing if you would like to challenge the basis of the officer's determination. However, even if you end up winning the DPS hearing if you plead to the DUI, DWI or APC that is also a basis to suspend the License and places you in the same position as if you had the hearing and lost.) <br /><br />What is important to know is that you must request your hearing or modification within 15 days. The request form is on the DPS website. Click here for a copy of the form. You can either represent yourself with the Department of Public Safety or have a lawyer represent you. If you are requesting a modification it is better that with the modification request form that you fill out the form "Information for a Modified Driver's License" and attach a $175 cashier's check or money order with the form. (This speeds up the process.) <br /><br />The DPS will send you a letter that will serve as a temporary license. (You must the original letter with the seal for the letter to be considered a valid license.) After receiving the modification request, the "Information for a Modified Driver's License" and the $175 the DPS will send you a letter directing you to have an ignition interlock placed upon your vehicle. (Yes almost everyone is required to have an ignition interlock.) Once the ignition interlock is on your vehicle you will receive a certificate that you must return to the DPS. All of the forms and letters from DPS are pretty self-explanatory. After a six month period your license can be re-instated without the ignition interlock and you can drive again without a interlock device. <br /><br />You will have to pay to have the ignition interlock placed on the vehicle and a monthly fee while the interlock device is on the vehicle.http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2010/01/what-to-expect-if-charged-with-alcohol.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7162895146725742184.post-4544517937437018022Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:40:00 +00002009-12-08T14:43:11.098-08:00The War on Drugs<div align="justify">When we look back over American history our history we can see multiple examples of great injustices. Now reasonable people agree that what our country did to Native Americans was a great injustice. Reasonable people agree that slavery and segregation was horrific. Imprisoning American citizens of Japanese decent during World War II was unacceptable behavior on our countries part. While we can all agree about these injustices now, during the time they were being committed these injustices had popular support.<br /><br />It seems incomprehensible to most modern citizens that the leaders of our country condoned the buying and selling of human beings. That people were property and the families could be torn apart at the whim of their 'master'. How could our country steal land from people that had occupied it for thousands of years. How could our country break treaty after treaty that we promised to keep? How could our country kill innocent women and children by providing them with diseased blankets? What were our leaders thinking when they decided to imprison American citizens of Japanese decent? There are other examples as well such as women's suffrage and segregation. Seeing these great injustices one has to ask the question; do we learn from our history?<br /><br />Only time will tell, but 50 years from now are the American citizens of 2060 going to look back at our society and ask "How could they imprison people because they had an addiction?'" Supporters of "The War on Drugs" often claim that "The War on Drugs" is an issue of morality. I would say like many of our countries great injustices of the past, it is an issue of immorality. Where is the morality in imprisoning someone because they have an addiction? What is moral about taking away a child's mother or father because that person is addicted to drugs? What is moral about spending tens of millions on prisons that would be better spent on treatment and education. What is moral about spending my tax dollars locking up an addict instead of spending that money educating our children or fixing our roads and bridges.<br /><br />Not only is "The War on Drugs" immoral it is ill-conceived and destined to fail. How many causalities will this war produce before we wake up an realize it? Those in charge of the "War on Drugs" have placed the horse behind the cart. Instead of focusing on treatment to help those addicted to drugs stop abusing them and education to help prevent new users; they have instead decided to focus the country's efforts on reducing the supply. That is a losing proposition. The problem with this approach is that it ignores the law of supply and demand. For example, if police officers arrest the biggest drug dealer in a particular town what have they really done? The reduced the supply of drugs temporarily. What affect will that have on the local drug market? It will drive up the price. Because most users of illegal drugs are addicted and they cannot stop using without help, so they will pay whatever they have to to get the drugs. It is the "whatever they have to" part that drives a lot of crime.<br /><br />Reducing the supply without reducing the demand also has another unintended consequence, it creates a greater incentive for others to become involved in selling drugs. Why? Higher prices equal greater profit. So our country has an endless supply of drug dealers. Where does that supply come from? It is our youth that we are not educating. It is the children that have had little guidance because we imprisoned their parents. It is children that grow up expecting to go to prison because that is what their parents, their brothers and sisters, their aunts and uncles, their grand parents did. To many people using and selling drugs being arrested and going to jail and prison is a family tradition.<br /><br />To effectively address the problem with drugs we have to address the demand not the supply. Without the demand the market will die. If you don't believe that look at the buggy whip industry. We have to refocus our efforts and focus on treatment and not incarceration. We have to focus on education.<br /><br />Since 1996 thirteen states have passed laws allowing medical marijuana. This is a start. Several countries in Europe have either legalized drugs or decriminalized drugs. Most people that die as a result of drugs die as a result of drug related violence. People who actually die yearly directly from illicit drug user is approximately 17,000. People who die yearly from adverse reactions from prescription drugs is approximately 32,000. If drugs were legalized and sold through licenced distributors drug related violence would drastically drop, the prices of drugs would drop which would decrease property crime related to the purchase of drugs, the prison population could be greatly reduced, we could spend the prison savings on drug treatment and education, not to mention the increased revenue from taxes.<br /><br />"The Drug War" is a failure, it is time to admit it.</div>http://blog.oklahomacriminallaw.com/2009/12/war-on-drugs.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Kevin Adams)0